15 votes

Ron Paul wins delegates in WA, political games or 'Survivor?' Unbelievable!

Saturday, at the Pierce County Republican Convention, Ron Paul won a couple of legislative districts, but you will not believe how it happened. First of all, I received an education no college politics class would probably ever address, and I bet the mainstream media has no idea about, because they do not have people on the ground rubbing shoulders for 17 hours, like I did, as a citizen's journalist in a delegate position for my precinct in Tacoma, Washington.

Have you ever seen the TV series called Survivor? Well, ladies and gentlemen, that show is not at all far from the reality of what happens in the choosing of delegates, and I now believe, has been happening around the country this year in the GOP Republican Party's delegate selection process. I don't know how many times yesterday, with my mouth dropped open, I asked other delegates, "What is going on, is this legal?!"

Read more: http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/11789243-ron-paul-...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Thanks for the report Steph

Retweeted your tweet.

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15


Thanks for the report; it is interesting, but confusing (at least to me).

When you mentioned talk about a "brokered convention" are you talking about the national convention? Why would that suddenly become a topic of discussion in the middle of your convention? Nothing new was happening relative to that; didn't the people at your convention already know about the possibilities of an open (not brokered) national convention going in?

With whom were you talking about getting left off the slate? You said you were telling them all the stuff you'd done for the RP campaign, which suggests you were talking to a RP supporter, but then which slate were they in charge of drawing up? If it wasn't a RP supporter, why would you regale them with your activities within the RP campaign if supporting RP is what's keeping RP supporters off the slate in the first place?

It must be tough to condense a day that long into one report; again, thanks for making the effort.

What is begun in anger, ends in shame.

Prospector Sam, thank you

I just did massive editing -- if you have a minute I would appreciate you looking at part 2 again and letting me know if it is still confusing. Your insights are greatly appreciated: http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/11789318-ron-paul-...

It is 2 reports, did you miss

It is 2 reports, did you miss part 1? I was talking to a RP leader who left me off the slate with no regard for the total votes, instead it was based on familiarity. Since he didn't know me I felt he should be made aware that I earned the votes to be a delegate and if he were basing his choices on whether I door knocked or made phone calls with him, then that was unfair because I work very hard for the campaign in other ways. Like I said in the article he apologized, all is good and I needed to taste that unfairness to understand Ron Paul's situation. It was an amazing experience. I have zero hard feelings, but felt a need to address the odd way they chose the slate, instead of looking at those who have the ability to speak and even persuade Santorum voters to choose them, which I did, when clearly I was with Ron Paul people. The irony was that I did not say who I supported and earned votes despite what the speaker said or who I was hanging out with. Like I said in the article "I wouldn't vote for anyone who does not say who they support," was stated by the speaker. The whole experience became a metaphor for Ron Paul's situation and a powerful lesson in the fact that often fairness and "politics" do not go together. Anyone could have done the same thing, but I like to be told what I may have done wrong so I told him that it was wrong. You did the same for me and I will go back and see if I can make it clearer. Thank you. It is always good to get other views.

Its meaningless...

they're simply attempting to use parliamentary manoeuvres to prevent us from successfully delegate sneak attacking them.

I'm not a lawyer nor an expert on party rules in whatever state you filmed that footage, but I'd bet my boots what he was doing was not illegal.

What it does do is illustrate quite nicely that the three other candidates are willing to work behind the scenes together to try and silence Paul supporters, because the one thing none of them can afford is the voice of reason dissenting at their precious party convention.

Its hard to send in the brute squad to get rid of protesters when they're on guest list. ;)

They wouldn't be doing it if

They wouldn't be doing it if he wasn't a threat! :-)


"Naught" means "zero." "All for naught." is the way you meant to use it, "all for nothing."

What do you think? http://consequeries.com/

What are you referring to,

What are you referring to, did I say that in my article? I'm not finding that...please help Miss Liberty -- love your little nickname "IMissLiberty" =-)

"Due to the animosity toward

"Due to the animosity toward Ron Paul, we tried to stay on the "down-low" which ended up being for not"

Should be "naught" at the end.

Ohhhhh! Thank you so much!

Ohhhhh! Thank you so much! If I was rich I'd hire you to edit for me! THANKS! =)

Nice "coinky dink"

I was just thinking about this "angle" just a few minutes before running across your article. I think you're spot on, btw.

Ha ha ha coinky dink? That's

Ha ha ha coinky dink? That's hilarious! Thanks, I LEARNED a lot in ONE very long day.